Development and Validation of Chemistry Self-Efficacy Scale for College Students

Abstract

This study described the process of developing and validating the College Chemistry Self-Efficacy Scale (CCSS) that can be used to assess college students’ beliefs in their ability to perform essential tasks in chemistry. In the first phase, data collected from 363 college students provided evidence for the validity and reliability of the new scale. Three dimensions emerged: self-efficacy for cognitive skills, self-efficacy for psychomotor skills, and self-efficacy for everyday applications. In the second phase, data collected from an independent sample of 353 college students confirmed the factorial structure of the 21-item CCSS. The Cronbach alpha coefficients ranged from 0.82 to 0.92. In addition, each dimension of the CCSS had moderate and significant correlations with student chemistry achievement and differentiated between major and non-major students. Followed by the additional validation studies, the CCSS will serve as a valuable tool for both instructors and researchers in science education to assess college students’ chemistry self-efficacy beliefs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. 1.

    The Turkish version of the scale is also available from authors.

References

  1. Anderman, E. M., & Young, J. (1994). Motivation and strategy use in science: Individual differences and classroom effects. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 811–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Andrew, S. (1998). Self-efficacy as a predictor of academic performance in science. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 27, 596–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Arbuckle, J. L., & Wothke, W. (1999). Amos 4.0 user’s guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baldwin, J., Ebert-May, D., & Burns, D. (1999). The development of a college biology self-efficacy instrument for non-majors. Science Education, 83, 397–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bandura, A. (2001). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales (revised). Retrieved May 26, 2005 from http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/banduraguide.html

  8. Benson, J. (1998). Developing a strong program of construct validation: a test anxiety example. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 17, 10–17, 22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Borget, M. M., & Gilroy, F. D. (1994). Interests and self-efficacy as predictors of mathematics/science-based career choice. Psychological Reports, 75(2), 753–754.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Britner, S. L., & Pajares, F. (2001). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, race, and gender in middle school science. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 7, 271–285.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Britner, S. L., & Pajares, F. (2006). Sources of science self-efficacy beliefs in middle school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 485–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Bybee, R. W. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy: From purposes to practices. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Cannon, J., & Scharman, L. C. (1995). Influence of a cooperative early field experience on preservice elementary teachers’ science self-efficacy. Science Education, 80, 419–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Chiappetta, E. L., & Koballa, T. R. (2002). Science instruction in the middle and secondary schools (5th ed.). Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Chiappetta, E. L., Sethna, G. H., & Fillman, D. A. (1993). Do middle school life science textbooks provide a balance of scientific literacy themes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 787–797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Czerniak, C. M. (1990). A study of self-efficacy, anxiety, and science knowledge in pre-service elementary teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Atlanta, GA, April.

  22. Dalgety, J., Coll, R. K., & Jones, A. (2003). The development of the Chemistry Attitudes and Experiences Questionnaire (CAEQ). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(7), 649–668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 582–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hampton, N. Z., & Mason, E. (2003). Learning disabilities, gender, sources of self-efficacy, self-efficacy beliefs, and academic achievement in high school students. Journal of School Psychology, 41, 101–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hilgard, E. R., Atkinson, R. C., & Atkinson, R. L. (1979). Introduction to psychology (7th ed.). New York: Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (1982). The role of the laboratory in science teaching: Neglected aspects of research. Review of Educational Research, 52(2), 201–217.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hoyle, R. H. (1995). Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guildford.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kupermintz, H. (2002). Affective and conative factors as aptitude resources in high school science achievement. Educational Assessment, 8(2), 123–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lau, S., & Roeser, R. W. (2002). Cognitive abilities and motivational processes in high school students’ situational engagement and achievement in science. Educational Assessment, 8, 139–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Lent, R. W., & Lopez, F. G. (1991). Mathematics self-efficacy: Sources and relation to science-based career choice. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38(4), 424–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lent, R. W., Lopez, F. G., & Bieschke, K. J. (1993). Predicting mathematics-related choice and success behaviors: Test of an expanded social cognitive model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42, 223–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Luzzo, D. A., Hasper, P., Albert, K. A., Bibby, M. A., & Martinelli, E. A. Jr. (1999). Effects of self-efficacy-enhancing interventions on the math/science self-efficacy and career interests, goals, and actions of career undecided college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 46, 233–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13–104). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future (The report of a seminar series funded by the Nuffield Foundation). London: King’s College London, School of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Mone, M. A., Baker, D. D., & Jeffries, F. (1995). Predictive validity and time dependency of self-efficacy, self-esteem, personal goals, and academic performance. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55, 716–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Multon, K. D., Brown, S. D., & Lent, R. W. (1991). Relation of self-efficacy beliefs to academic outcomes: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38, 30–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 543–578.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Pajares, F. (1997). Current directions in self-efficacy research. In M. L. Maehr & P.R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 1–49). Greenwich, CT: JAI.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Pajares, F., & Kranzler, J. (1995). Self-efficacy beliefs and general mental ability in mathematical problem-solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 426–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Pajares, F., & Miller, M. D. (1994). The role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in mathematical problem-solving: A path analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 193–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Pintrich, P. R., & DeGroot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Riggs, I. M., & Enochs, G. (1990). Toward the development of an elementary teacher’s science teaching efficacy belief instrument. Science Education, 74, 625–637.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving of the self. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Rubeck, M. L., & Enochs, L. G. (1991, April). A path analytic model of variables that influence science and chemistry teaching self-efficacy and outcome expectancy in middle school science teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Lake Geneva, WI.

  48. Shell, D. F., Colvin, C., & Bruning, R. H. (1995). Self-efficacy, attributions, and outcome expectancy mechanisms in reading and writing achievement: Grade-level and achievement-level differences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 386–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Shell, D. F., Murphy, C. C., & Bruning, R. H. (1989). Self-efficacy and outcome expectancy mechanisms in reading and writing achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(1), 91–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Singer, M. S. (1993). Starting a career: An intercultural choice among overseas Asian students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 17, 73–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Steiger, J. H., & Lind, J. C. (1980). Statistically based tests for the number of common factors. Paper presented at the Psychometric Society Annual Meeting, Iowa City, IA.

  52. Stevens, J. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Tobin, K. G. (1990). Research on science laboratory activities. In pursuit of better questions and answers to improve learning. School Science and Mathematics, 90, 403–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783–805.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Watters, J. J., & Ginns, I. S. (2000). Developing motivation to teach elementary science: Effect of collaborative and authentic learning practices in preservice education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11, 301–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). San Diego: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Zimmerman, B. J., & Bandura, A. (1994). Impact of self-regulatory influences on writing course attainment. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 845–862.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

We would like to acknowledge the help of Serdar Atılgan for his assistance with the collection of the data for this study and thank to Prof. Dr. Anita Woolfolk Hoy for her valuable comments on earlier versions of this manuscript.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Esen Uzuntiryaki.

Appendix

Appendix

The College Chemistry Self-Efficacy Scale

Directions: This questionnaire is designed to help us gain a better understanding of the kinds of things that create difficulties for students in chemistry. Please indicate your opinion about each of the statements below. Please do not skip any item. Your answers are confidential.

THANKS FOR YOUR HELP ☺

  Very poorly Poorly Average Well Very well
1. To what extent can you explain chemical laws and theories? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2. How well can you choose an appropriate formula to solve a chemistry problem? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
3. How well can you establish the relationship between chemistry and other sciences? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
4. How well can you describe the structure of an atom? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
5. How well can you work with chemicals? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
6. How well can you describe the properties of elements by using periodic table? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
7. How well can you read the formulas of elements and compounds? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
8. To what extent can you propose solutions to everyday problems by using chemistry? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
9. How well can you interpret chemical equations? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10. How well can you explain the particulate nature of matter? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
11. How well can you construct laboratory apparatus? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
12. To what extent can you explain everyday life by using chemical theories? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
13. How well can you collect data during the chemistry laboratory? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
14. How well can you interpret graphs/charts related to chemistry? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
15. How well can you use the equipment in the chemistry laboratory? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
16. How well can you understand the news/documentary you watched on television related to chemistry? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
17. How well can you interpret data during the laboratory sessions? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
18. How well can you write a laboratory report summarizing main findings? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
19. How well can you solve chemistry problems? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
20. How well can you carry out experimental procedures in the chemistry laboratory? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
21. How well can you recognize the careers related to chemistry? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Uzuntiryaki, E., Çapa Aydın, Y. Development and Validation of Chemistry Self-Efficacy Scale for College Students. Res Sci Educ 39, 539–551 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9093-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Self-efficacy
  • Chemistry self-efficacy
  • Scale development
  • Scale validation
  • College students